After having and using a Romy G AK and a Polish Tantal and these recent Chinese Type 56 SKS, I have to say that the SKS seems to be better in every aspect. They are reliable, lack stamped parts, are just as accurate and just as rugged. I think they feel a lot more solid and the trigger is appreciably better. The SKS doesn't use detachable mags, but with stripper clips you can load them pretty quick. The safety is a lot more ergonomic. I would guess that the major factor making the AK the winner is that they are select fire in 99% of the world and are cheaper to make.

I hated my commercial Norinco early 90s SKS. These new ones give me a whole new appreciation for the well made Russian pattern ones.

rodngun762

12-04-2012 10:24 PM

1 Attachment(s)

Hard to disagree with what you said. I just wish I bought a whole crate of 'em back in the good old days...80 bucks for a shooter grade yugo! (fall 2005, aim surplus catalog)

A battle field and a target range are two different things. I guess you compare the 2 because they shoot the same caliber?

E Michael

12-04-2012 11:52 PM

backstrap, I don't believe he is speaking battlefield. Most of us here in the good ol CA have very limited variations of guns and an sks can be pretty much as is and as for the AK its got its balls chopped off as does any dog that has an owner that likes Bob Barker.

NOTABIKER

12-05-2012 11:28 AM

i agree with you. AK cheaper to make, full auto and large capacity mag. none of this matters in civilian life. after getting my first SKS i no longer want a AK. i do think the AK is a little cooler looking though.

John Browning

12-05-2012 5:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by backstrap
(Post 9854530)

A battle field and a target range are two different things. I guess you compare the 2 because they shoot the same caliber?

Please Mr. Brilliant, tell me where I went wrong in comparing two rifles that played major roles in ALL of the wars fought by communists.

I compare the two because they served the same purpose. If I'm arming an army of peasants, I'd prefer the simplicity of logistics associated with ammo on stripper clips rather than magazines. The only advantages I can see in the AK are 30 round mags (which some of us Californians have from way back when) and cheap production. Everything else seems to go to the SKS, and the 30 round mags are a beeyotch out of the prone position.

RAMCHARGER

12-05-2012 5:27 PM

Once I burned through all that ammo a stocked up on when I bought my Saiga I stopped using it. Took it out maybe 3 times in four years. It sits in my attic. Turned out the AK didnt do it for me...
I started mising the SKS I traded for an M1 carbine years ago...
I finally got one of the classic Arms SKS and Its christmas as a kid al over again!

backstrap

12-05-2012 6:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by scobun
(Post 9858823)

Please Mr. Brilliant, tell me where I went wrong in comparing two rifles that played major roles in ALL of the wars fought by communists.

I compare the two because they served the same purpose. If I'm arming an army of peasants, I'd prefer the simplicity of logistics associated with ammo on stripper clips rather than magazines. The only advantages I can see in the AK are 30 round mags (which some of us Californians have from way back when) and cheap production. Everything else seems to go to the SKS, and the 30 round mags are a beeyotch out of the prone position.

Panties in a bunch little lady? I simply asked why you compared the 2. Some consider the SKS and Garand comparible. Im sorry I asked a question Mr. Cool guy. I thought you were looking for correspondense now I know to only listen to you and not ever question you lol. This is the part where you imply how tuff you are in real life, I will exit now, something tells me you have a vast skill and knowledge of typing kung fu.

toby

12-05-2012 6:49 PM

WHATEVER^^^^ anyway I prefer the Mini over any of them, battle proven or not!

John Browning

12-05-2012 7:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by backstrap
(Post 9859312)

Panties in a bunch little lady? I simply asked why you compared the 2. Some consider the SKS and Garand comparible. Im sorry I asked a question Mr. Cool guy. I thought you were looking for correspondense now I know to only listen to you and not ever question you lol. This is the part where you imply how tuff you are in real life, I will exit now, something tells me you have a vast skill and knowledge of typing kung fu.

I don't know how I'll make it without your pointless, aloof and idiotic posts, but I'm going to try anyway.

gotshotgun?

12-05-2012 7:36 PM

:lurk5:

E Michael

12-05-2012 8:35 PM

I know some SKS have 20 round fixed mags, my buddy has a russian that is 20 round fixed....

Marcus von W.

12-05-2012 8:51 PM

The correct answer is you gotta have both. And an SVT-40. And a few cool Mosins.

And everything but the SVT in a laminated stock. Why didn't the stupid commies make laminated SVT stocks after WW2 like they did Mosin and SKS stocks?

I like M38 carbines better than M44's, but the SKS and M43 (which was later adopted as the M44) were developed side by side at Tula in May 1943, and a lot of the features from the various 7 or 8 M43 designs and prototypes that didn't make it on the M44 were used on the SKS. So besides my laminated stock M38, I do also have a laminated stock M44 in it's correct original early stock.

Why did the Soviets never think to shorten the SKS to AK length and put a detachable mag on it?

I would love, love, love to have a paratrooper length Soviet SKS that takes AK mags and is in a laminated stock. That would be almost as good hot, nasty, no holds barred, wild-eyed sex with Elizabeth Banks. (yes, I know she is an Obama loving lefty Marx-licker, but tell me you wouldn't do her!)

hakenlag

12-05-2012 9:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus von W.
(Post 9860306)

<snip>

I would love, love, love to have a paratrooper length Soviet SKS that takes AK mags and is in a laminated stock. That would be almost as good hot, nasty, no holds barred, wild-eyed sex with Elizabeth Banks. (yes, I know she is an Obama loving lefty Marx-licker, but tell me you wouldn't do her!)

Wait 65 years, look at the SKS, then look look a Lizzy-Left, then look back at the SKS..... Which one do you think will look better?

Marcus von W.

12-05-2012 9:17 PM

In 65 years neither Lizzy nor I will be here. But with a little care, the SKS will still be looking and shooting like new.

SKSer45

12-05-2012 9:19 PM

well in CA SKS>AK any day of the week. Out in the rest of the free states AK>SKS. However, if your a hardcore fan can always get one of these :)

Have the back bone of the SKS but can take AK mags. Can't go wrong with either one of them.

MrTokarev

12-05-2012 10:09 PM

The SKS has a longer barrel and should theoretically have a greater range than the AK. They are also machined.

In many ways the SKS is a better gun than the AK-47 even if it isn't a better combat weapon for modern warfare. That being said, I still wouldn't want to get shot at with one.

Josh Smith

12-06-2012 12:57 AM

Hello,

If it's not going to be full-auto but still a gas arm, I'll take the SKS every time. Designed as the SKS-41, it initially took the 7.62x54R round.

When production actually began, the SKS-45 had been rechambered to the 7.62x39, a new, intermediate, rimless round based on the 7.62x54R, using the idea behind the 7.92x33K.

Ever notice how the bolt stroke of the SKS is long enough to take a full-size round... yet it has a smaller magazine? Yep. That's why.

There were a few made for front-line trials in 1944-45 -- about 10,000 -- and the troops loved them.

My only beef with the SKS is the trigger pull. It utilizes a sliding sear, and as such, the trigger is long, doesn't return when you let off of it, and the sear tends to develop a slope after a while.

You can always take one of the trigger groups apart and recut the sear, but that leads to rehardening and all that is one lousy ***** to do.

I no longer have one, but should I find one that is not overpriced, I will probably buy another. I love bolt actions for accuracy and precision, but sometimes one just needs volume fire. If I do end up with another one, I think I'll end up finding a way to make the sear roll on bearings, much as I do with my Mosin triggers.

Still, there's really not much I would do with an SKS that I can't do as well with a Mosin or a Gewehr. I'm coming to really like pistols and pistol-caliber carbines (blowback versions) for volume fire for any sort of serious activity. I prefer to be able to free a hand if I need it.

It's most excellent for those of us who do not like pistol grips on our rifles, as well. The bayonet serves as a monopod for precision shooting, and if you know a 'Nam combat vet who talks about that war, you might ask him about hearing the bayonets click into place... Some I've talked to say that was one of the scariest things in that war.

Some sniper versions were built. The Russians played with the idea and some prototypes exist in their museums, while the Yugoslavians fielded a M59/66 with a Type 89 (I think) 'scope.

What it all boils down to is an insanely fun carbine that can be very deadly if one should need it to be. Like the M1 Carbine, it's almost an assault rifle, but not quite!

Regards,

Josh

NOTABIKER

12-06-2012 6:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAMCHARGER
(Post 9858965)

Once I burned through all that ammo a stocked up on when I bought my Saiga I stopped using it. Took it out maybe 3 times in four years. It sits in my attic. Turned out the AK didnt do it for me...
I started mising the SKS I traded for an M1 carbine years ago...
I finally got one of the classic Arms SKS and Its christmas as a kid al over again!